Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Army Developing Armor Tailored For Females

Posted by Unknown on from the still-waiting-for-armored-skants dept.

cylonlover writes, quoting Gizmag: "Body armor is a blessing and a curse for soldiers. Modern tactical armor has saved thousands of lives from bullets and bombs, but it can also be a major problem if it doesn't fit properly. That's what the women who make up 14 percent of the U.S. Army face on a regular basis. Now, according to the Army News Service, the Army is preparing to test a new armor that is tailored to the female form to replace the standard men's armor that the women now use. Working on data collected in studies overseas and at stateside army bases, the Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier has identified several problem areas and has developed a new armor that will be tested in 2013."

7 of 310 comments (clear)

  1. My novel idea by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My novel idea is reducing injuries and fatalities through getting involved in fewer conflicts. It is a radical idea, but it just might work.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:My novel idea by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How will that make defense contractors rich?

    2. Re:My novel idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I agree in principle, that doesn't remove the need for this kind of advancement. Regardless of how peaceful and friendly you are, there's always a chance of someone, somewhere attacking you, at which point you probably want to have decent gear for your armed forces.

    3. Re:My novel idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My novel idea is reducing injuries and fatalities through getting involved in fewer conflicts. It is a radical idea, but it just might work.

      That's not something the Army has authority to do, though. Talk to the politicians if you want our military commitments to change.

  2. Doesn't look effective... by Uthic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All my gaming experience has taught me that it should be skin-tight and leaves arms, legs and midriff bare.

  3. Re:bewbs? by DerekLyons · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are the main differences really torso length, should width, and waist size?

    They're a huge part of the difference, yes.
     

    Or are the authors just being polite and not highlighting jugs as a factor?

    Or maybe they're just being professionals rather than juveniles. (Really, four different slang terms in one post? Grow up.) Or, and I find this likely, given the wide variation in sizes and position of female breasts (and there's no real correlation with other body measurements) they're going for the same "one size fits mostly all" approach.

  4. Sounds good by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We'll just disband the military entirely and stop all research. After all, if we don't want to get in to a conflict, it'll never happen right? No nation has EVER been attacked or invaded without starting shit.

    Oh please. While I agree that the US need to stop trying to play world police and getting involved in shit all over, that doesn't mean that a military still isn't going to be needed. Not many countries can get away with having no military and the ones that can it is only because another nation or nations protects them.

    This is quite a sensible thing for the military to spend money on. Some women wish to serve as soldiers, they should have body armour that works for them.